INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
Supreme Court dealt a blow on Friday to the power of federal judges by restricting their ability to grant broad legal relief in cases as the
administration to narrow the scope of three nationwide injunctions issued by federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state
that halted enforcement of his directive while litigation challenging the policy plays out
has a duty to follow the law
But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation - in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from
equitable authority to issue universal injunctions
refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or
directive, according to the plaintiffs who challenged it, including the Democratic attorneys general of 22 states as well as immigrant
rights advocates and pregnant immigrants.The case before the Supreme Court was unusual in that the administration used it to argue that
ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War of 1861-1865 that ended slavery in the United States
understood to confer citizenship to virtually anyone born in the United States, does not extend to immigrants who are in the country
illegally or even to immigrants whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas.In a June 11-12
Reuters/Ipsos poll, 24% of all respondents supported ending birthright citizenship and 52% opposed it
Among Democrats, 5% supported ending it, with 84% opposed
Among Republicans, 43% supported ending it, with 24% opposed
The rest said they were unsure or did not respond to the question.The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has handed Trump
some important victories on his immigration policies since he returned to office in January.On Monday, it cleared the way for his
administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could
In separate decisions on May 30 and May 19, it let the administration end the temporary legal status previously given by the government to
Venezuelan migrants under a 1798 law historically used only in wartime, faulting his administration for seeking to remove them without
adequate due process.The court heard arguments in the birthright citizenship dispute on May 15
Supreme Court ruling in a case called United States v
Wong Kim Ark long has been interpreted as guaranteeing that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to
Republican and Democratic - and can prevent the government from enforcing a policy against anyone, instead of just the individual plaintiffs
who sued to challenge the policy.Proponents have said they are an efficient check on presidential overreach, and have stymied actions deemed
